Association of Black Race With Physical and Chemical Restraint Use Among Patients Undergoing Emergency Psychiatric Evaluation.

IF 3.2
Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-12-21 DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.202100474
Colin M Smith, Nicholas A Turner, Nathan M Thielman, Damon S Tweedy, Joseph Egger, Jane P Gagliardi
{"title":"Association of Black Race With Physical and Chemical Restraint Use Among Patients Undergoing Emergency Psychiatric Evaluation.","authors":"Colin M Smith,&nbsp;Nicholas A Turner,&nbsp;Nathan M Thielman,&nbsp;Damon S Tweedy,&nbsp;Joseph Egger,&nbsp;Jane P Gagliardi","doi":"10.1176/appi.ps.202100474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Few studies have examined the disproportionate use of restraints for Black adults receiving emergency psychiatric care. This study sought to determine whether the odds of physical and chemical restraint use were higher for Black patients undergoing emergency psychiatric care compared with their White counterparts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center retrospective cohort study examined 12,977 unique encounters of adults receiving an emergency psychiatric evaluation between January 1, 2014, and September 18, 2020, at a large academic medical center in Durham, North Carolina. Self-reported race categories were extracted from the electronic medical record. Primary outcomes were the presence of a behavioral physical restraint order or chemical restraint administration during the emergency department encounter. Covariates included age, sex, ethnicity, height, time of arrival, positive urine drug screen results, peak blood alcohol concentration, and diagnosis of a bipolar or psychotic disorder.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 961 (7.4%) encounters involved physical restraint, and 2,047 (15.8%) involved chemical restraint. Models with and without a race covariate were compared by using quasi-likelihood information criterion scores; in each instance, the model with race performed better than the model without. Black patients were more likely to be physically (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.07-1.72) and chemically (AOR=1.33; 95% CI=1.15-1.55) restrained than White patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>After analyses were adjusted for measured confounders, Black patients undergoing psychiatric evaluation were at higher odds of experiencing physical or chemical restraint compared with White patients, which is consistent with the growing body of evidence revealing racial disparities in psychiatric care.</p>","PeriodicalId":520759,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)","volume":" ","pages":"730-736"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.202100474","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

Objective: Few studies have examined the disproportionate use of restraints for Black adults receiving emergency psychiatric care. This study sought to determine whether the odds of physical and chemical restraint use were higher for Black patients undergoing emergency psychiatric care compared with their White counterparts.

Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study examined 12,977 unique encounters of adults receiving an emergency psychiatric evaluation between January 1, 2014, and September 18, 2020, at a large academic medical center in Durham, North Carolina. Self-reported race categories were extracted from the electronic medical record. Primary outcomes were the presence of a behavioral physical restraint order or chemical restraint administration during the emergency department encounter. Covariates included age, sex, ethnicity, height, time of arrival, positive urine drug screen results, peak blood alcohol concentration, and diagnosis of a bipolar or psychotic disorder.

Results: A total of 961 (7.4%) encounters involved physical restraint, and 2,047 (15.8%) involved chemical restraint. Models with and without a race covariate were compared by using quasi-likelihood information criterion scores; in each instance, the model with race performed better than the model without. Black patients were more likely to be physically (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.07-1.72) and chemically (AOR=1.33; 95% CI=1.15-1.55) restrained than White patients.

Conclusions: After analyses were adjusted for measured confounders, Black patients undergoing psychiatric evaluation were at higher odds of experiencing physical or chemical restraint compared with White patients, which is consistent with the growing body of evidence revealing racial disparities in psychiatric care.

在接受紧急精神病学评估的患者中,黑人种族与物理和化学约束的关系
目的:很少有研究调查了在接受紧急精神科护理的黑人成年人中不成比例地使用约束。这项研究试图确定,与白人患者相比,接受紧急精神护理的黑人患者使用物理和化学约束的几率是否更高。方法:这项单中心回顾性队列研究调查了2014年1月1日至2020年9月18日期间在北卡罗来纳州达勒姆的一家大型学术医疗中心接受紧急精神病学评估的12977名成年人的独特遭遇。从电子病历中提取自我报告的种族类别。主要结果是在急诊科遇到的行为物理约束令或化学约束管理的存在。协变量包括年龄、性别、种族、身高、到达时间、尿液药物筛查阳性结果、血液酒精浓度峰值以及双相情感障碍或精神障碍的诊断。结果:肢体约束961例(7.4%),化学约束2047例(15.8%)。使用准似然信息标准分数比较有和没有种族协变量的模型;在每个实例中,有种族的模型都比没有种族的模型表现得更好。黑人患者更有可能身体不适(调整后优势比[AOR]=1.35;95%置信区间[CI]=1.07-1.72)和化学(AOR=1.33;95% CI=1.15-1.55)比白种人患者克制。结论:在对测量的混杂因素进行分析后,与白人患者相比,接受精神病学评估的黑人患者经历物理或化学约束的几率更高,这与越来越多的证据表明精神病学治疗中的种族差异是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信